Statistically...what are the chances that Maddie was abducted..

[jassi]

of course there was..there is  a witness statement...that is evidence...that's why witnesses give EVIDENCE in the form of a witness statement in court

This could be a false witness and the statement hasn't been given in court.

[j.rob]

The McCanns offered a theory as to what happened that night.  It is merely an opinion as they claim they were not there and had no prior knowledge. So they cannot 'know' what happened to their daughter, unless they had something to do with it. Therefore Kate's claim that she 'knew' cannot be correct, unless she had something to do with it.

That the parents of a missing child would need to offer a theory, rather than simply 'not knowing' unfortunately starts to place Madeleine as being within the 'typical' rather than 'atypical' abduction cases.

And, don't forget, statistically, there is only a 16 per cent chance that her parents or family had nothing at all to do with her disappearance.

[Mr Gray]

Working on the basic premise that the child was abducted what are the mechanics of it? Looking at it as an RCA the primary event would be the abduction of the child:-

Abduction of child=> child crossing paths with an abductor=> the abductor being present =>
        => the child letting themselves out of the apartment
  =>   
        => the abductor breaking into the apartment.

1 What proof is there of the child letting itself out?.
2 What proof is there of a break in?. (bearing in mind the (ESN to some) PJ don’t believe there was a break in)
3 What proof is there of the presence of an abductor.
If someone can prove beyond reasonable doubt that either 1 or 2 occurred simultaneously with 3 then there are reasonable grounds for believing there was abduction. Otherwise it’s up for grabs and arguing along the lines “because it is” or “if a sewing machine had bigger wheels it would be a car” don’t cut it.

 well if you expect proof you aint gonna get it on a forum...

[Redblossom]

The McCanns offered a theory as to what happened that night.  It is merely an opinion as they claim they were not there and had no prior knowledge. So they cannot 'know' what happened to their daughter, unless they had something to do with it. Therefore Kate's claim that she 'knew' cannot be correct, unless she had something to do with it.

That the parents of a missing child would need to offer a theory, rather than simply 'not knowing' unfortunately starts to place Madeleine as being within the 'typical' rather than 'atypical' abduction cases.

And, don't forget, statistically, there is only a 16 per cent chance that her parents or family had nothing at all to do with her disappearance.

The only reason they "knew" is cos the window and shutter were found open....apparently so that proves a stranger did it

Of course theres no evidence for this

[j.rob]

of course there was..there is  a witness statement...that is evidence...that's why witnesses give EVIDENCE in the form of a witness statement in court

According to resort staff, there was no sign of forced entry. Police found no sign of forced entry into the apartment.

Please provide evidence that supports your claim that the shutters had been 'jemmied' or 'forced'.

[stephen25000]

maddie was put to bed and later disappeared...the shutter was forced up from the outside and the window opened...
enough to support the belief that Maddie was abducted.

Utter rollocks. 8-)(--)

[Mr Gray]

This could be a false witness and the statement hasn't been given in court.

 of course they could...but it hasn't been necessary to challenge them in court because there isn't the evidence to even arrest the McCanns never mind charge them

[Redblossom]

Utter rollocks. 8-)(--)

I believe the right word is bollocks

[stephen25000]

of course there was..there is  a witness statement...that is evidence...that's why witnesses give EVIDENCE in the form of a witness statement in court

Which court and when ?

[Mr Gray]

According to resort staff, there was no sign of forced entry. Police found no sign of forced entry into the apartment.

Please provide evidence that supports your claim that the shutters had been 'jemmied' or 'forced'.

Evidence is witness statement of Kate and Gerry...that the shutters had been forced upwards....they never said the shutters had been damaged

[Cariad]

maddie was put to bed and later disappeared...the shutter was forced up from the outside and the window opened...
enough to support the belief that Maddie was abducted.

Ok, fine, say that's actually true (though it's not) how is that evidence of a stranger abduction and not, say, a staged abduction to cover up the death of a child left alone?

It is not evidence of abduction at all! Even though I left out that there was no sign of forced shutters!

[Mr Gray]

Utter rollocks. 8-)(--)

To you with your closed mindset and poor understanding of the facts but it appears that SY agree with me and thats what counts

[Mr Gray]

Which court and when ?

oh dear...cant you understand english

[j.rob]

of course they could...but it hasn't been necessary to challenge them in court because there isn't the evidence to even arrest the McCanns never mind charge them

Rubbish.

Social workers would have had a field-day with this case in England. It is completely irresponsible to leave children of that age alone at night. There was also no excuse as there was a free evening creche and babysitting at very reasonable cost.

Kate even admits that Madeleine cried one night and asked why they didn't come.

There are massive child protection issues here. And that is just the very tip of the most enormous iceberg.

And you know it. So do they. So does everyone, actually.

That's why this case is so extraordinary.

[icabodcrane]

of course there was..there is  a witness statement...that is evidence...that's why witnesses give EVIDENCE in the form of a witness statement in court

What a silly thing to say 

Either there is phsysical /forensic evidence that the shutter were  'forced up from the outside'  or there is not 

In this case there was  not

A hundred 'witnesses'  could  'say'  the shutter was forced from the outside and it would matter not a jot  unless there was physical evidence to support the claim 

(  who is this  'witness' who said the shutters were forced from the outside anyway  ?  )